Skip to content
ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW at a glance

· Private foundation

ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$737k
Granted FY2026still arriving
17
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$175k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$1.6MAnimals$1.2MFood & Nutrition$200kArts & Culture$165kHealth$125kHuman Services$90kEducation$60kRecreation & Sports$5k
02FY2026 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • $10k–50k11 grants · $195k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $542k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER$175,000
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM$110,000
INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION$80,000
MEQUON NATURE PRESERVE$75,000
ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MILW$51,933
HUNGER TASK FORCE$50,000
VIVENT HEALTH$40,000
WISCONSIN HUMANE SOCIETY$25,000
LAKE MICHIGAN BIRD OBSERVATORY$25,000
RESTORING LANDS$20,000
RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER$20,000
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE$15,000
SCHLITZ AUDUBON NATURE CENTER$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MILWAUKEE$10,000
BOERNER BOTANICAL GARDENS$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–26, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE GATHERING OF SE WI: $20k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE: $15k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.0M · 19 repeat orgs$165k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against -3% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2026, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
7

Total granted

$4.0M
$90k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
-3%

Still filing today

84%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
EnvironmentAnimalsArts & CultureHuman ServicesHealthRecreation & SportsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC
    10× · 2017–2026 · $885k · revenue +113%
  • INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC
    10× · 2017–2026 · $651k · revenue +57%
  • MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC
    6× · 2020–2026 · $250k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • FA
    FEEDING AMERICAN EASTERN WI
    one grant, 2023 · $30k
  • GATHERING OF SOUTHEAST WI INC
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +22%
  • AA
    ARTS AT LARGE INC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -27%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Milwaukee Audubon Society Inc

Protect and restore Wisconsin's natural heritage and ecology through active leadership, education and stewardship

Environment
2
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
3
Milwaukee Riverkeeper Inc

Our mission is to protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the river corridors and to advocate for sound land use in the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds.

Environment
4
Southeast Wisconsin Land Conservancy

Obtain and manage land of ecological significance.

Environment
5
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation Inc

The wisconsin wildlife federation has a dual mission to engage in conservation education and to advocate for sound conservation policy.

Environment
6
Mississippi Valley Conservancy Inc

The mission of mississippi valley conservancy is to conserve native habitats and farmlands in the driftless area for the health and well-being of current and future generations.

Environment
7
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
8
Lincoln Park Zoological Society

Lincoln park zoo is dedicated to connecting people with nature by providing a free, family-oriented wildlife experience in the heart of chicago and by advancing the highest quality of animal care, horticulture, education, science and…

Animals
9
Friends of Wisconsin State Parks Inc

To preserve, promote, protect, and enhance wisconsin state parks, forests, trails, and recreation areas.

Recreation & Sports
10
Landmark Conservancy Inc

Landmark conservancy is a nationally accredited, nonprofit conservation organization serving 20 counties across northwest wisconsin. their mission is to conserve wisconsin's natural legacy for everyone...forever.

Environment
11
Zoological Society of Milwaukee Endowment Trust

To provide support & funding for the mission of the zoological society of milwaukee & the milwaukee county zoo.

Animals
12
Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association Inc

To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of Schlitz Audubon Nature Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Crane Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

24 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 24 of the 31 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
17/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $885,000 · EnvironmentURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INCMequon Nature Preserve Inc: $558,000 · EnvironmentMequon Nature Preserve IncRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC: $120,000 · EnvironmentRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INCALDO LEOPOLD NATURE CENTER INC: $96,500 · EnvironmentALDO LEOPOLD NATURE CENTER INCRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $65,000 · Environment+4 more: $52,030 · EnvironmentINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $651,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INCZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MILWAUKEE CTY: $394,298 · AnimalsZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MILWAUKEE CTYWISCONSIN HUMANE SOCIETY: $195,000 · AnimalsWISCONSIN HUMANE SOCIETYFELLOW MORTALS INC: $87,500 · AnimalsFELLOW MORTALS INCHOOS WOODS RAPTOR CENTER: $73,500 · AnimalsHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $200,000 · OtherHUNGER TASK …BOERNER BOTANICAL GARDENS: $110,000 · OtherBOERNER BOTA…FRIENDS OF SCHLITZ AUDUBON: $60,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF S…FEEDING AMERICAN EASTERN WI: $30,000 · OtherFEEDING AMER…LAKE MICHIGAN BIRD OBSERVATORY: $25,000 · OtherLAKE MICHIGA…+4 more: $38,680 · Other+4 moreMILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC: $250,000 · Arts & CultureARTS AT LARGE INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureMILWAUKEE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $10,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $5,000 · Arts & CultureVIVENT HEALTH INC: $164,666 · HealthNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC: $105,000 · Human ServicesGATHERING OF SOUTHEAST WI INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF LAKESHORE STATE PARK: $5,250 · Recreation & Sports
Environment$1,776,530Animals$1,401,298Other$463,680Arts & Culture$275,000Health$164,666Human Services$125,000Recreation & Sports$5,250

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $885,000 over 10y, 3.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $651,000 over 10y, 0.7% of budgetMequon Nature Preserve Inc: $558,000 over 10y, 8.4% of budgetZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MILWAUKEE CTY: $394,298 over 10y, 0.4% of budgetMILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC: $250,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $200,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetWISCONSIN HUMANE SOCIETY: $195,000 over 10y, 0.1% of budgetVIVENT HEALTH INC: $164,666 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetRIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC: $120,000 over 8y, 14% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC: $105,000 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetALDO LEOPOLD NATURE CENTER INC: $96,500 over 10y, 0.7% of budgetFELLOW MORTALS INC: $87,500 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetHOOS WOODS RAPTOR CENTER: $73,500 over 9y, 14% of budgetRIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC: $65,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetGATHERING OF SOUTHEAST WI INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetDRIFTLESS AREA LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $12,030 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetARTS AT LARGE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF SCHLITZ AUDUBON NATURE CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMILWAUKEE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetFRIENDS OF LAKESHORE STATE PARK: $5,250 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetMADISON CHILDREN'S MUSEUM INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Mequon Nature Preserve Inc ↗
  • Who funds ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MILWAUKEE CTY ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER TASK FORCE INC ↗
  • Who funds WISCONSIN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds VIVENT HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds RIVER REVITALIZATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE OF MILWAUKEE INC ↗
  • Who funds ALDO LEOPOLD NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds FELLOW MORTALS INC ↗
  • Who funds HOOS WOODS RAPTOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds RIVEREDGE NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds LAKE MICHIGAN BIRD OBSERVATORY ↗
  • Who funds RESTORING LANDS INC ↗
  • Who funds GATHERING OF SOUTHEAST WI INC ↗
  • Who funds DRIFTLESS AREA LAND CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds ARTS AT LARGE INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF SCHLITZ AUDUBON NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MILWAUKEE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds GATHERING WATERS INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF LAKESHORE STATE PARK ↗
  • Who funds MADISON CHILDREN'S MUSEUM INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Herbert H Kohl Charit…Green Bay Packers Fou…Greater Milwaukee Fou…Dorothy Inbusch Found…Baird Foundation IncJohn C Bock FoundationJames E Dutton Founda…The Brookby FoundationRalph Evinrude Founda…National Fish and Wil…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Dudley and Constance …
Herbert H Kohl Charities IncWI27.8× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Dorothy Inbusch Foundation Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · John C Bock Foundation · James E Dutton Foundation Inc · The Brookby Foundation · Ralph Evinrude Foundation Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Dudley and Constance Godfrey Foundation Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW?

    Find your warmest path to ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 31 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on ANTONIA FOUNDATION INCco F MICHAEL ARNOW’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home